They don't just give you the fights on TV, they have info on any talk
show, boxing movie or TV appearance by any major boxing figure that week. This is a way
cool sight that the Bucket checks out on a weekly basis.

As long as I'm plugging boxing web sites, I might as well continue... First
off, the CBZ doesn't look at other sites as competition. We are all on line for the same
reason: We love boxing & want to get the word out ....

http://www.boxmag.com/ Ring
magazine writer & good friend of the CBZ, Jim Trunzo, has a terrific site
featuring interactive boxing games & articles by a fine staff of writers .

In future editorials I will be spot lighting some more sites for our readers
to peruse.

*********

Another subject that should be addressed is the constant flow of
e-mails requesting really obscure & recondite information. A lot of these posts
have been from family members of former fighters who don't have much info about their
careers. It has been very gratifying helping out these families.

Among the many people we have helped have been the families of such
diverse fighters as, Jackie "Kid" Berg, Barney Ross, Benny Bass, King Tut, Abe
Attell, Jess Willard & many, many, others.

What people have to understand is that we are overwhelmed with requests
for info. We diligently attempt to answer each one, but please be patient, a lot of this
information takes a long time to dig up...

Some of these requests are truly absurd. One of my favorites was from a
guy in Wisconsin, who wrote that his girlfriend had been a ring card girl in a fight in
Milwaukee in 1972 or was it in '73 or '74? He didn't even know who was fighting but
somebody took a picture of his girlfriend which was published in a newspaper; though
he wasn't sure which one! Anyway, he demanded (!) that I find him said picture .... Is it
just me, or was this guy out of his freakin' mind???

Anyway, please people, use some common sense before you submit your requests
... Also, a simple please or thank you is all we require as payment for our services ....

*********

Well that's about all the ranting for this month ... Hope everyone enjoys the
new issue. Before I sign off I would like to mention the addition of two talented young
writers to our staff, Henry Martinez & Alan Taylor. I know you
will enjoy their views of the Sweet Science.

Last, but certainly not least, I'm happy to announce that the one &
only Joe Bruno is back. JB, a former VP of the Boxing Writers Association, is one of the
most controversial boxing writers I've ever read. He is not a man who minces words or
parses opinions...

Joe & The Ol' Spit Bucket are both cantankerous sob's & we had a
falling out over some boxing issues that we both felt very strongly about - as in
disagreed vehemently. But time passes & life is too short & I like the crusty
sum'bitch. Besides, Joe, while he may piss some people off, is a standup guy & always
writes the truth as he sees it.

Now that his top flight career is surely over, how will Pernell Whitaker
be remembered? Is he an all-time great or just an also-ran?

Born in Norfolk, Virginia in 1964 Whitaker was had an outstanding amateur
career, taking gold as part of the USA 'dream team' of the 1984 Olympics, a team which
included future champions Evander Holyfield, Meldrick Taylor and Mark Breland. While
most now agree that Holyfield has earned his place amongst the pantheon of greats,
that Taylor's flame burned brightly but waned quickly and that Breland was a damp squib -
Whitaker's case is a more complicated one.

Turning pro shortly after his Olympic success Whitaker became the first
undisputed lightweight champion since Roberto Duran, beating all comers. He went on
to win titles at light-welter, welter and light-middle but never won the hearts of boxing
fans nor, it seems, the respect of many boxing 'experts'. Despite being rated by
some 'pound-for-pound' champion in the early nineties Whitaker never seemed to gain
recognition for his achievements. Even his nickname 'Sweet-Pea' came from a
misunderstanding - reporters mishearing sweet 'Pete', the name Pernell's friends know him
by. He also suffered the indignancy of having this nickname spelt 'Sweat Pea' on his
gown in one bout. Where does this lack of respect come from?

To a large extent Whitaker's style is what turns people off. He has
the reputation of a 'fancy dan', a runner who takes the safety first approach. But
surely to accept this view is to misunderstand the 'art' of boxing. Whitaker is
certainly no one punch knockout artist. He is light years away from a Marciano style
face first slugger. 'I get a kick out of going the distance', Pernell has said. 'I
like to dodge my opponents. And while I'm no banger, I'm good at what I do.' And at
his peak, as a lightweight, Whitaker was not merely good he was among the best.

A southpaw, Whitaker certainly did display superb defensive skills but it
was more than just staying out of trouble. Whitaker could stand right in front of an
opponent and land fast combinations while avoiding being hit. He constantly changed
angles, creating punching opportunities. He could turn an opponent, leave him
floundering, only to reappear behind him. It was hard to believe that teleportation
was not involved. Fast hands, quick footwork, a hard straight left, a great jab -
Pernell Whitaker had the lot. He also was a master of body punching, an art that
most neglect these days.

The list of opponents that Whitaker 'toyed' with is impressive - Roger
Mayweather, Greg Haugen, Azumah Nelson, Jose Luis Ramirez, Jorge Paez, Freddie Pendelton -
all victims of shutouts. The total number of rounds Whitaker lost could be counted
without taking your socks off. But still many were unimpressed. In his first
title fight, against Ramirez, Whitaker was the victim of one of the most outrageous
robberies since Jesse James became Mr. Howard. Forget Holyfield and Lewis, this
was the real thing; Ramirez hardly landed a punch yet was handed the win by split
decision. In a rematch the scores were 120-109, 120-108, and 117-111 (the judge who
gave Ramirez three rounds must have been family!).

'Counterpunching, defensive style' the critics maintained, but,
Haugen for example was overwhelmed by a fighter who could seemingly hit him at will.
'No punch' they said, yet Juan Nazario was bowled over in the first round as Whitaker
unified the titles. 'No chin' they cried. 'I really don't want to know what
will happen if I get hit on the chin', Whitaker replied. 'That's why I'll be a
moving target'. He frustrated opponents and critics alike.

'There's nothing exciting about me until I get into the ring'. Pernell
said. Many maintained that there was nothing exciting period. But this was to
ignore the artistry in Whitaker's natural ability, his ring generalship.
But you cannot ignore the record books. As a lightweight I would contend that
Whitaker is top five material. He should be respected and revered with
Roberto Duran, Benny Leonard, Joe Gans and Henry Armstrong. Many may laugh at
the idea that Whitaker should be mentioned in the same sentence as these greats but think
- how would Duran have handled Whitaker? Could he have hit him or would it have been 'no
mas'? Would Armstrong's windmill style have blown Pernell away or would Sweetpea
have been too quick? I believe that Whitaker should be thought of as the natural
successor to Willie Pep, a master tactician who was always in complete control. But
I fear he won't be.

When Whitaker eventually got to fight Julio Cesar Chavez, the UK's highly
respected 'Boxing News' previewed the fight by declaring that a Whitaker win would be the
'upset of the decade'. What, more of an upset than Tyson-Douglas? The judges
obviously agreed with this completely unbiased opinion - they scored the fight a draw -
the biggest robbery since.... well, since the last time they robbed Whitaker.